Pigeonho
Well-Known Member
'Protect' him?Mancio said:
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Balotelli's agent.
- Thread starter Rich
- Start date
He has himself to blame in the sense that he has to learn to be very very careful. He will be judged by the media, many refs,, and many fans on a more severe level than most other players. This is at least partly due to the efforts of various in the media, certain managers, players, fans, to make him into the latest ogre in the EPL.masterwig said:Mario only has himself to blame I'm afraid. He's entertaining but every time he plays I'm terrified he'll get sent off.
He has to learn to behave with the maximum self-control. If he can learn to do that he may be OK. But I wouldn't bet on it even then, given the different standards applied to different players.
SWP's back
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 29 Jun 2009
- Messages
- 89,079
Mancio in being a clown shockPigeonho said:'Protect' him?Mancio said:mario has to go play in a club that has the power to protect him.
Inter had not, and the City is proving to not have it.
there are only 4 clubs in the world who have the strength to protect him, scum, Bayern, Real Madrid and AC Milan, unfortunally.
BoyBlue_1985
Well-Known Member
Mancio said:mario has to go play in a club that has the power to protect him.
Inter had not, and the City is proving to not have it.
there are only 4 clubs in the world who have the strength to protect him, scum, Bayern, Real Madrid and AC Milan, unfortunally.
FUCK MY LIFE
Mr Dick meet Mr Head
mike winterwasp
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 4 Jun 2009
- Messages
- 284
On the evidence of endless slow motion replays no one can tell whether it's deliberate. Not a mark on Parker, no appeals or complaints from any of the Spurs players, Mario goes to check Parker is ok. In a court of law not a chance of a conviction so earlier today I was advocating an appeal on the basis that it might succeed because with the dodgy evidence there was no way the FA would increase the ban. Foolishly I forgot it's not about the evidence now that Webb the Rag has ruled on it. I really don't buy the view held on here by some that it was deliberate - you just can't tell. In fact based solely on the evidence Lescott's elbow is far more deserving of a charge and Crouch's actions which could have blinded Ollson are the worst of the lot.
What really gets me is those on here who don't give our player the benefit of the doubt. You expect it of the man who opens a bank account in his dog's name, of Souness one of the dirtiest bastards to ever play football and of the Press who are there to sell papers - nothing else. But I don't expect it from the likes of Paul Simpson whose comments on TV were a disgrace.
What really gets me is those on here who don't give our player the benefit of the doubt. You expect it of the man who opens a bank account in his dog's name, of Souness one of the dirtiest bastards to ever play football and of the Press who are there to sell papers - nothing else. But I don't expect it from the likes of Paul Simpson whose comments on TV were a disgrace.
Crouchinho said:The fact that City aren't appealing shows he's guilty. It's blatant and there for everybody to see.
If Webb had sent him off I bet the ban would be less? I don't know how that works.
That's a very stupid conclusion to draw.
We know we won't win appeal regardless of whether he meant it or not(considering the Kompany appeal) so there's no point appealing and getting an extra game ban when we're at a crucial part of the season. Then again, i suspect you already knew this could also be a reason but decided to post your nonsense anyway, thanks for the 6 points!
Re: Re: Balotelli's agent.
That has to be a joke. Please name the second one, in England, so I can see you're not pulling my leg? Oh, and take off the blue glasses so we can have sensible discussion. There's a guy who plays for my Pub team who'd disagree with you for one..............................
-- Tue Jan 24, 2012 9:36 pm --
Rubbish. My eyes were open, the difference being mine weren't blurred by the blue tinted specs you had on!
I know he's our player, but really,come on. And even IF you were right, that's ONE, and only one, decision that was suspicious out of numerous. Which tends to support my arguement, and not yours.
moomba said:ANY1aBLUE said:Pigeonho said:Maybe he should have a word with his client then and tell him that stamping on an opponents head usually results in being banned.
Neither Balotelli or his agent have anything to be annoyed about.
Agree with this. Much as we like Balo - I haven't seen one decision made by any Ref against him so far, which i've thought was wrong. Except Webb not sending him off against Spurs!
Are you serious? He's the most harshly treated footballer in England.
That has to be a joke. Please name the second one, in England, so I can see you're not pulling my leg? Oh, and take off the blue glasses so we can have sensible discussion. There's a guy who plays for my Pub team who'd disagree with you for one..............................
-- Tue Jan 24, 2012 9:36 pm --
Sky Blue said:ANY1aBLUE said:- I haven't seen one decision made by any Ref against him so far, which i've thought was wrong. Except Webb not sending him off against Spurs!.
Liverpool away. Undeservedly red carded (2nd yellow). Referee swayed by the home crowd baying for blood and Charlie Adam and co doing elbow gesticulations. Open your eyes.
Rubbish. My eyes were open, the difference being mine weren't blurred by the blue tinted specs you had on!
I know he's our player, but really,come on. And even IF you were right, that's ONE, and only one, decision that was suspicious out of numerous. Which tends to support my arguement, and not yours.
A
A
Anonymous
Guest
Re: Re: Balotelli's agent.
Then the yellow he got on Sunday. First challenge.
Then we examine Graham Poll's comments "...when you look at a player like Balotelli..." Like Balotelli? Just exactly what is that supposed to mean? But he goes on further "...you look at what mood he is in..."; ok, so you are gonna base any decision on how he looks rather than what he has done. "...and you give a yellow early on to try and keep a lid on it..."; riiiight, so you as a referee back yourself into a corner immediately by looking for ANYTHING remotely foul like to book him which will force you hand later if he commits another offence.
But he's not victimised.
However, I'll back down away from this as you play for a pub team with a lad who would disagree so clearly end of debate; how could we ever challenge that?
Ok, let's start with the Liverpool game where he was sent off very harshly and at the behest and influence of Liverpool's players on the referee.ANY1aBLUE said:moomba said:ANY1aBLUE said:Agree with this. Much as we like Balo - I haven't seen one decision made by any Ref against him so far, which i've thought was wrong. Except Webb not sending him off against Spurs!
Are you serious? He's the most harshly treated footballer in England.
That has to be a joke. Please name the second one, in England, so I can see you're not pulling my leg? Oh, and take off the blue glasses so we can have sensible discussion. There's a guy who plays for my Pub team who'd disagree with you for one..............................
Then the yellow he got on Sunday. First challenge.
Then we examine Graham Poll's comments "...when you look at a player like Balotelli..." Like Balotelli? Just exactly what is that supposed to mean? But he goes on further "...you look at what mood he is in..."; ok, so you are gonna base any decision on how he looks rather than what he has done. "...and you give a yellow early on to try and keep a lid on it..."; riiiight, so you as a referee back yourself into a corner immediately by looking for ANYTHING remotely foul like to book him which will force you hand later if he commits another offence.
But he's not victimised.
However, I'll back down away from this as you play for a pub team with a lad who would disagree so clearly end of debate; how could we ever challenge that?
mike winterwasp said:On the evidence of endless slow motion replays no one can tell whether it's deliberate. Not a mark on Parker, no appeals or complaints from any of the Spurs players, Mario goes to check Parker is ok. In a court of law not a chance of a conviction so earlier today I was advocating an appeal on the basis that it might succeed because with the dodgy evidence there was no way the FA would increase the ban. Foolishly I forgot it's not about the evidence now that Webb the Rag has ruled on it. I really don't buy the view held on here by some that it was deliberate - you just can't tell. In fact based solely on the evidence Lescott's elbow is far more deserving of a charge and Crouch's actions which could have blinded Ollson are the worst of the lot.
What really gets me is those on here who don't give our player the benefit of the doubt. You expect it of the man who opens a bank account in his dog's name, of Souness one of the dirtiest bastards to ever play football and of the Press who are there to sell papers - nothing else. But I don't expect it from the likes of Paul Simpson whose comments on TV were a disgrace.
The trouble with the arguement that starts from a preposition that we should all defend 'our' player in the face of the obvious errant behaviour - is that he fails to learn from it. He needs to know that this behaviour isnt good for our team and provides all our critics with all the ammo they need to stir up the hatred.
Interestingly, no one has mentioned Nasri obviously lecturing Balo immediately after the incident..................................